Johnson Concrete Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 13, 1953

106 N.L.R.B. 1255 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

JOHNSON CONCRETE COMPANY 1255
[The Board certified Amalgamated Clothing Workers of
America, CIO, as the designated collective-bargaining repre-
sentative of the employees in the unit found appropriate in the
Decision and Direction of Election herein.
JOHNSON CONCRETE COMPANYand UNITED STONE AND
ALLIED PRODUCTS OF AMERICA, CIO, Petitioner. Case
No. 11-RC-545. October 13, 1953
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Louis
Perloff , hearing officer . The hearing officer's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
The Employer is a North Carolina corporation engaged in
the manufacture and sale of concrete blocks and pipe, at its
plant in Salisbury, North Carolina. During the year ending
June 29, 1953 , the Employer purchased cement in the amount
of $133,638.82 from outside the State of North Carolina, and
sold $2,677.46 worth of products outside the State of North
Carolina . Of its total sales , valued at more than $470,000,
approximately $2,000 to Cannon Mills Corporation and $11,000
to J.A. Jones Construction Company represent the only sales
to companies engaged in interstate commerce. The Employer
also sold concrete pipe valued at approximately $ 87,000 to the
North Carolina State Highway and Public Works Commission for
the construction, maintenance, and repair of county roads in the
State of North Carolina.
The Employer moved to dismiss the petition on the ground
that its operations do not affect commerce within the meaning
of the Act , and that, in any event , the Board ought not assert
jurisdiction here.
It is clear on the foregoing evidence that the operations of
the Employer affect commerce within the meaning of the Act,
and that the Board could assert jurisdiction .' We are concerned,
however, not only with the question of whether the Board is
empowered to exercise jurisdiction , but also whether it is
administratively advisable to do so in a case of this kind. In the
light of past Board decisions on this question , the only theory
under which jurisdiction could be taken is that the Employer
furnishes goods valued at $ 50,000 a year or more to an instru-
mentality of interstate commerce. 2 We donotbelieve that the
concept of instrumentalities of interstate commerce should be
so broadly construed as to encompass so remote an activity as
the construction of county roads.
IN. L. R. B. v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U S. 1.
2 Hollow Tree Lumber Company, 91 NLRB 635.
106 NLRB No. 219.
1256 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
While we do not depart from the policy of asserting juris-
diction over enterprises which furnish services valued at
$50,000 or more to direct instrumentalities of interstate com-
merce, we find that the construction of county roads is too re-
mote an extension of that policy to warrant our taking juris-
diction here.' Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.
3Camp Concrete Company, 94 NLRB 296, cited by the Petitioner as authority for assertion
by the Board of jurisdiction herein, is inapposite. In that case the materials sold to the State
Road Department of Florida were for use "in necessary maintenance of the State's highway
system," and not, as is the case here, for county roads.
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION and INTERNA-
TIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL, RADIO & MACHINE
WORKERS, C.I.O., Petitioner and FEDERATION OF
WESTINGHOUSE INDEPENDENT SALARIED UNIONS, Pe-
titioner . Cases Nos . 2-RC-6028 and 2-RC-6040.1 October
13, 1953
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held
before Leonard S. Kimmell, hearing officer. The hearing
officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case , the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent
certain employees of the Employer.
3. Questions affecting commerce exist concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.'
4. International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine
Workers, CIO, herein called the IUE, seeks to represent
the salaried unit for which the UE is the presently certified
bargaining representative.' The Federation of Westinghouse
1 On August 14, 1953, the Regional Director for the Second Region consolidated Cases Nos.
2-RC-6027, 2-RC-6028, and 2-RC-6040. After the consolidated hearing the parties to Case No.
2- RC- 6027 entered a stipulation for certification upon consent election. Accordingly, the Board
on September 9, 1953, severed that case from the instant proceeding and remanded it to the
Regional Director for further proceedings in accordance with the agreement of the parties.
2 For the reasons stated in our recent Decision in Westinghouse Electric Corporation,
106 NLRB 1349, we reject the contention advanced by United Electrical, Radio & Machine
Workers of America, Local 426, U.E., herein called the UE, that its contract with the
Employer of November 1, 1950, as extended, constitutes a bar to a present determination
of representatives.
3See Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 89 NLRB 812.
106 NLRB No. 214.